ONE of the biggest problems with the increasingly bitter dispute between the regulator and Guernsey Post over partial deregulation is knowing who to believe.

No, that’s not to cast doubt on what either are saying. The integrity and commitment of the two individuals respectively heading the Office of Utility Regulation and GPL is not in any way being called into question.

However, the whole issue is exceptionally complex and there is a huge amount of detail to absorb before anyone is able to reach a conclusion whether the postal operation is able to achieve more efficiency and bear more competition.

In short, no one other than the regulator, whose role it is to understand the businesses it regulates, and GPL itself will know anything like enough to reach a conclusion on this.

For the rest of us, and that includes Treasury and Resources as taxpayer representative, trying to reconcile the massive differences between the two parties boils down to making a judgment call on what each has said.

So whose version do you feel most comfortable with?

Guernsey Post has been open to criticism of its efficiencies and has tightened up accordingly. In other words, it is not a naysayer.

Yet it jibs at the extra savings the OUR is insisting on and would argue that the only way of proving the regulator is wrong is by letting the business fail.

In the meantime, a very public dispute is becoming highly politicised – but aren’t the very people who may be called on to resolve it, the deputies, in the same difficulties as the rest of us in making a call?

The alternative, of course, is an appeal to the Royal Court, where the OUR would have to prove the validity of its case against Guernsey Post.

No one wants that, or the costs it would entail, but it is at least the route envisaged by the States when regulation was introduced and the court is equipped to weigh facts.

In the meantime, islanders know that they are about to witness a violent car crash and simply want to stop it from happening.